I was a bit burned out from writing this weekend for all sorts of reasons, so I didn’t write anything about Rush Limbaugh’s comments and subsequent apology. So, I thought I missed my chance to write anything on the subject.
Then I read yesterday that he said that what he said was really the fault of liberals. Even if I took his advertiser induced apology seriously, that pretty much wipes out any contrition, donnit?
(By the way, “poor choice of words”? Are there better ways to question the private character of a stranger?)
This gives me the chance to point out a few things that I found wrong with his comments and the reaction to Sandra Fluke’s testimony.
First off, Limbaugh’s (and others too) objections to the compromise is that people like him are being “forced” to pay for birth control pills. What, through taxes? Well, that would be interesting because the policy deals with private insurance plans. If you want to argue from a free market perspective against mandates on industry, have at it. But convincing your followers that their hard earned tax money is going to pay for family planning is lying, pure and simple.
Second comes the monumentally objectionable notion that Fluke was demanding to have her sex life subsidized. Nope. Nope for a couple of reasons.
Her testimony dealt with a friend of hers who had a condition that was being dealt with with perscription drugs that could also be used for birth control.
In other words, she was making no claims about her own sexual habits (which would be none of Limbaugh’s business in the first place) and the friend she was arguing on behalf of wasn’t going to use the medicine for birth control.
Her friend is using a medication that was also birth control for a medical condition, that makes Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.” This sort of leap on Limbaugh’s part says more about him and his warped view of women than it does about Fluke.
And another thing: Viagra is also indicated for other medical conditions. Should “we,” since by their definition a payment by an insurance plan is paid by “we,” pay for a man’s sexual escapades? What if he’s taking it because of circulation issues? Should he prove it?
Well, we don’t ask those questions. Insurers have to pay for Viagra. You know why? John McCain and Jon Kyl voted for the bill that tells them to.
I need some help here, what makes that different?